Grade Shaming

AudreyHepburn · 11-08-2015 08:55AM

I can see where these students are coming from and the idea that some here seem to have that this is just about some students being overly sensitive about their grades is rubbish in my opinion.

Every year it drives me mad opening the newspaper when the LC results and seeing article after article about all the students who got straight As. Yes it's a great achievement and yes they should be proud but the reality is that it is a rare few that can achieve such a result and that just because the majority of students probably won't get all As does not mean they won't do brilliantly and get the marks they want.

And it's not necessarily a mark of intelligence either....it's easy to memorise information and regurgitate it on the day, it doesn't mean you are Einstein or that your friend achieved say Bs and Cs is not as smart as you.

I think it's unfair to put such results and achievements on a pedestal, as if they are the only results worth celebrating.

valoren · 11-08-2015 09:11AM

It's a tradition.

It's a tradition that I would imagine served as a motivation for students.

Knowing that your results would be publicly displayed should serve as an incentive to actually do the work you are there to do and get the First.

If the results are to be anonymous, you would still know who got a Geoff Hurst. How? They will tell you

Akrasia · 11-08-2015 09:16AM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

And it's not necessarily a mark of intelligence either....it's easy to memorise information and regurgitate it on the day, it doesn't mean you are Einstein or that your friend achieved say Bs and Cs is not as smart as you.

Its easy for some people to memorise information, for others it's really hard.

I find it impossible to remember 'facts' like dates and formulae

I can't remember the birthdays of my own children. it's not like I'm not motivated to remember these dates. I was there for all of their births, and they're the same every year. It's just not how my brain works.

But I find it much easier to understand processes and how things work.

The education system is biased in favour of people who have naturally good recall memory even if they have poor problem solving or logical or reasoning skills.

In the past recall memory was very important, but now we can outsource these to the great reference library in our pocket, google.

Our education systems are anachronistic. We need to move them into the 21st century

Regarding the public posting of exam results. Most people would not be happy if their boss posted up details of their annual performance review for everyone to see...

One eyed Jack · 11-08-2015 09:22AM

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

I can see where these students are coming from and the idea that some here seem to have that this is just about some students being overly sensitive about their grades is rubbish in my opinion.

Every year it drives me mad opening the newspaper when the LC results and seeing article after article about all the students who got straight As. Yes it's a great achievement and yes they should be proud but the reality is that it is a rare few that can achieve such a result and that just because the majority of students probably won't get all As does not mean they won't do brilliantly and get the marks they want.

That's exactly why we should celebrate their achievements, and it should make no difference to the students who as you put it won't do brilliantly but will still get the marks they want. We don't celebrate mediocrity.

And it's not necessarily a mark of intelligence either....it's easy to memorise information and regurgitate it on the day, it doesn't mean you are Einstein or that your friend achieved say Bs and Cs is not as smart as you.

It's a damn good marker of academic intelligence all the same, and if it were indeed so easy, then there's no reason why everyone isn't capable of doing the same. If someone else is only getting Bs and Cs, then that's a reflection of the effort they put in. Whether that's a reflection of their intelligence is entirely debatable.

I think it's unfair to put such results and achievements on a pedestal, as if they are the only results worth celebrating.

They are, in the context of academic achievement. I really hope we don't adopt this idea of "everyone's a winner" in academia because it takes away from those who actually are special and belittles their achievements.

I see no issue with publishing people's names and their results in public, I see a hell of a lot more wrong with allowing for those at the bottom to dictate the rules for those at the top.

Medusa22 · 11-08-2015 09:37AM

I can't believe there is even a phrase for this, grade shaming, gah. I understand that some students might feel uncomfortable having their names posted next to their results, especially if they haven't done well and I wouldn't be thrilled about it myself. I do think it is a little oversensitive all the same, and this is coming from someone who obsessed over exam results. However, I think it would just be more convenient and avoid any complaints of ''grade shaming'' if the results are posted with the student number or exam number. This is the system that was used when I went to UCD and I had no issue with it. Of course some people might have known what my student number was but really, if they could be bothered to look up my results too, then they had nothing better to do with their time. I don't see an issue with celebrating those who received all As in the Leaving Cert either, I certainly didn't get all As but I was never aiming for that anyway and I just thought ''good for them'', well at the time I probably thought ''my god, what swotty losers, they must have had no lives'' :pac:

smash · 11-08-2015 09:52AM

Robsweezie wrote: »

I did a quick search of the ''shaming'' phenomenon and combined it with the subject of academic grades, and yes, we even have a ''shaming'' for that too.

Hasn't that always been the case? I've even been witness to teachers call their students stupid over their results.

Ave Sodalis · 11-08-2015 10:11AM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

They are, in the context of academic achievement. I really hope we don't adopt this idea of "everyone's a winner" in academia because it takes away from those who actually are special and belittles their achievements.

That's the thing though, I don't agree with the whole "everyone is a winner" thing either but I don't agree that those who achieve high grades are special. There's far more involved with regard to grades than just "oh that person was good at this subject". It's more like "oh that person got good marks therefore they must be very intelligent, but that person got bad marks therefore they must be an idiot" when there are far too many forms of intelligence. If you get high grades in school, it doesn't make you special. You can, for example, get 600 points in your Leaving but still be an idiot in terms of common sense, emotional intelligence, IQ etc. Plus, that doesn't account for what's going on on the day of the exam. You could be sick, you could have a bereavement, you could do what I did and break your writing hand two days before the exams start. Getting high marks doesn't make you special but that's the way it's interpreted by many.

Robsweezie · 11-08-2015 10:15AM

sup_dude wrote: »

That's the thing though, I don't agree with the whole "everyone is a winner" thing either but I don't agree that those who achieve high grades are special. There's far more involved with regard to grades than just "oh that person was good at this subject". It's more like "oh that person got good marks therefore they must be very intelligent, but that person got bad marks therefore they must be an idiot" when there are far too many forms of intelligence. If you get high grades in school, it doesn't make you special. You can, for example, get 600 points in your Leaving but still be an idiot in terms of common sense, emotional intelligence, IQ etc. Plus, that doesn't account for what's going on on the day of the exam. You could be sick, you could have a bereavement, you could do what I did and break your writing hand two days before the exams start. Getting high marks doesn't make you special but that's the way it's interpreted by many.

Yes. People often forget that. Emotional intelligence is important to have.

WildWater · 11-08-2015 10:22AM

As far as I am aware publishing (publicly displaying) lists of grades by student number, either with our without names, is breach of data protection legislation. Publishing these list was the norm in my university but it is no longer accepted practice due to the above.

Historically, there was also an expedience argument for doing so. It could take weeks for the institution to formally notify the student by mail. Today such justification holds no weight as, in an efficient institution, grades can be made available to each individual shortly after the results being finalised.

Akrasia · 11-08-2015 10:25AM

sup_dude wrote: »

That's the thing though, I don't agree with the whole "everyone is a winner" thing either but I don't agree that those who achieve high grades are special. There's far more involved with regard to grades than just "oh that person was good at this subject". It's more like "oh that person got good marks therefore they must be very intelligent, but that person got bad marks therefore they must be an idiot" when there are far too many forms of intelligence. If you get high grades in school, it doesn't make you special. You can, for example, get 600 points in your Leaving but still be an idiot in terms of common sense, emotional intelligence, IQ etc. Plus, that doesn't account for what's going on on the day of the exam. You could be sick, you could have a bereavement, you could do what I did and break your writing hand two days before the exams start. Getting high marks doesn't make you special but that's the way it's interpreted by many.

I lost my glasses 4 days before my final college exams.
I'm as blind as a naked mole rat and my optician had to get an emergency pair made up where the lenses were so thick and heavy that the glasses kept falling off my face every time I looked down

Trying to write an exam paper where you can't look down was an interesting experience.

conorh91 · 11-08-2015 10:29AM

Akrasia wrote: »

But I find it much easier to understand processes and how things work.

The education system is biased in favour of people who have naturally good recall memory even if they have poor problem solving or logical or reasoning skills.

I think it's a overly dismissive of the LC to imply, as many do, that it doesn't reward creative thinking or reasoning ability.

A lot of the leaving cert is tactical: knowing what to exclude, what to study, and how to study it so that you beat the next guy, requires very strategic thinking.

Within the individual disciplines, whilst examiners may reward regurgitation to a more or lesser extent, some subjects like honours maths, the physical sciences, and even languages, require a keen reasoning ability and practical aptitude. You do not get an A1 by recalling facts alone.

Anyway, people are sometimes too hard on recalling facts. Some careers, like lawyers, doctors, and managers, are heavily reliant on the ability to quickly absorb and recall facts, as well as the ability to understand systematic processes. It's not a case of needing one skillset and not the other.

Akrasia · 11-08-2015 10:41AM

conorh91 wrote: »

I think it's a overly dismissive of the LC to imply, as many do, that it doesn't reward creative thinking or reasoning ability.

A lot of the leaving cert is tactical: knowing what to exclude, what to study, and how to study it so that you beat the next guy, requires very strategic thinking.

Within the individual disciplines, whilst examiners may reward regurgitation to a more or lesser extent, some subjects like honours maths, the physical sciences, and even languages, require a keen reasoning ability and practical aptitude. You do not get an A1 by recalling facts alone.

Anyway, people are sometimes too hard on recalling facts. Some careers, like lawyers, doctors, and managers, are heavily reliant on the ability to quickly absorb and recall facts, as well as the ability to understand systematic processes. It's not a case of needing one skillset and not the other.

I don't mean to be dismissive of the LC. The kids who do well put in an enormous amount of work and deserve the praise they get. Even the most privileged child still needs to put in hundreds of hours of disciplined hard work to get the best results under the most stressful conditions imaginable.

One eyed Jack · 11-08-2015 10:46AM

sup_dude wrote: »

That's the thing though, I don't agree with the whole "everyone is a winner" thing either but I don't agree that those who achieve high grades are special. There's far more involved with regard to grades than just "oh that person was good at this subject". It's more like "oh that person got good marks therefore they must be very intelligent, but that person got bad marks therefore they must be an idiot" when there are far too many forms of intelligence.

And it's fine to say there are far too many forms of intelligence, but the only form of intelligence that matters in academia is... academic intelligence. I for example lack far more forms of intelligence than I possess, and I also lack many physical capabilities that other people have. That is just a fact. Consoling myself with the idea that I have intelligence other people don't, really isn't going to alter the facts. I'm never going to play sports at any high degree, and I'm never going to be artistic or creative. But I make the best use of what I have got rather than piss and moan because I haven't got what someone else has. There's nothing to stop me aspiring to their level if that's what I really want to do, but they shouldn't be told keep quiet about their achievements because little Jack is very sensitive about the fact that he can't play football for shyte! :pac:

If you get high grades in school, it doesn't make you special. You can, for example, get 600 points in your Leaving but still be an idiot in terms of common sense, emotional intelligence, IQ etc.

Yes you can, I should know :pac: Lucky for me that day they were testing academic intelligence and not social, emotional nor kinetic intelligence. There are other arenas in which people who possess those forms of intelligence will excel. The old adage of "who you know, not what you know" seems somewhat of a truism when you account for the fact that people who excel in sports tend to look after their own too. If you aren't academically strong, there's no reason for that to put the skids on your career, and vice versa when it comes to being shyte at sports - no reason for that to put the skids on your career.

Plus, that doesn't account for what's going on on the day of the exam. You could be sick, you could have a bereavement, you could do what I did and break your writing hand two days before the exams start. Getting high marks doesn't make you special but that's the way it's interpreted by many.

Oh come on now, those are very subjective examples. Apart from breaking your wrists, those other examples are things that are going to crop up all throughout your life, and we shouldn't be making excuses like that for people who perform below an expected standard. Exemplary achievements in ANY field does make that person stand out, and does make them special, and that's exactly why their achievements are interpreted that way by many.

Thankfully, it's only a minority who seem to want to cosset, protect and smother underachievers in a comfort blanket of entitlement delusion rather than encourage and motivate them to aspire to do better.

Ave Sodalis · 11-08-2015 11:09AM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

And it's fine to say there are far too many forms of intelligence, but the only form of intelligence that matters in academia is... academic intelligence.

But that's exactly my point. Many, if not majority of people don't think it's just academic intelligence.

DarkyHughes · 11-08-2015 11:13AM

I don't care how some stranger did in their exams.

pickarooney · 11-08-2015 11:35AM

They can always console themselves with the wise words of the Great Shamen - E's are good.

Medusa22 · 11-08-2015 11:43AM

sup_dude wrote: »

That's the thing though, I don't agree with the whole "everyone is a winner" thing either but I don't agree that those who achieve high grades are special. There's far more involved with regard to grades than just "oh that person was good at this subject". It's more like "oh that person got good marks therefore they must be very intelligent, but that person got bad marks therefore they must be an idiot" when there are far too many forms of intelligence. If you get high grades in school, it doesn't make you special. You can, for example, get 600 points in your Leaving but still be an idiot in terms of common sense, emotional intelligence, IQ etc. Plus, that doesn't account for what's going on on the day of the exam. You could be sick, you could have a bereavement, you could do what I did and break your writing hand two days before the exams start. Getting high marks doesn't make you special but that's the way it's interpreted by many.

Well, with many exams, especially nowadays with continuous assessment in college, the overall grade is often taken into consideration, rather than just one test. Though I know that isn't always the case, and not for the LC. That being said though, I sat my final exam for my degree with a fever of over 38 degrees and I still managed to get an A. Maybe the examiner just liked my feverish ramblings though

One eyed Jack · 11-08-2015 11:47AM

sup_dude wrote: »

But that's exactly my point. Many, if not majority of people don't think it's just academic intelligence.

If people are still ashamed of being called idiots at secondary or third level education, then chances are they're not registering too high on the social or emotional intelligence IQ scale either tbh.

That's why if this were a kindergarten, such sentiments might be understandable, but it's Cambridge for jesus sake, one of the top academic institutions in the world, where students are now talking about being excused from having their underwhelming underachievement under scrutiny.

How the hell did they get into Cambridge?

Ave Sodalis · 11-08-2015 11:58AM

One eyed Jack wrote: »

If people are still ashamed of being called idiots at secondary or third level education, then chances are they're not registering too high on the social or emotional intelligence IQ scale either tbh.

That's why if this were a kindergarten, such sentiments might be understandable, but it's Cambridge for jesus sake, one of the top academic institutions in the world, where students are now talking about being excused from having their underwhelming underachievement under scrutiny.

How the hell did they get into Cambridge?

No, you're still not really getting what I'm saying. I'm saying what should only be measuring academic achievement is being used as a universal measurement of intelligence when it shouldn't be, which is probably why people have issue with their grades being so public.

Special Circumstances · 11-08-2015 12:00PM

pickarooney wrote: »

They can always console themselves with the wise words of the Great Shamen - E's are good.

Very much maligned and misunderstood:pac:

jimgoose · 11-08-2015 12:07PM

Delicate enough little flowers at Cambridge right enough. Just like Oxford, Eton and Harrow. :pac:

Public publishing of exam results is something you'd expect from a more proletarian establishment like Trinity, though.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5 · 11-08-2015 01:02PM

sup_dude wrote: »

No, you're still not really getting what I'm saying. I'm saying what should only be measuring academic achievement is being used as a universal measurement of intelligence when it shouldn't be, which is probably why people have issue with their grades being so public.

But doesn't concealing the grades on the basis of those concerns just validate that mindset? If getting 58% in a class means nothing more than you got 58% in that class, then why give a crap if people know?

Jesus Wept · 11-08-2015 01:08PM

darkpagandeath wrote: »

To get a job...

Does not make any sense.

conorh91 wrote: »

It's easy to work out who's who.

When I was a student there, some of the more competitive guys had worked out a list of student numbers with corresponding names. I guess people like to know who their competitors are.

They sound pathetic.

One eyed Jack · 11-08-2015 01:42PM

sup_dude wrote: »

But that's exactly my point. Many, if not majority of people don't think it's just academic intelligence.

sup_dude wrote: »

No, you're still not really getting what I'm saying. I'm saying what should only be measuring academic achievement is being used as a universal measurement of intelligence when it shouldn't be, which is probably why people have issue with their grades being so public.

I do get what you're saying. It's obvious to more people though that if a person is underachieving in an academic context when they are capable of achieving more, then the obvious conclusion that can be drawn from that is not that they lack academic intelligence, but simply that they are indeed an idiot.

What these students are suggesting is that they should have their underachievement protected. It's they who are ashamed of their underachievement. The way to resolve that problem is for them to make more of an effort, that is their responsibility. It's not the responsibility of people who are making the effort to have to be ashamed of the amount of effort that they put in to achieve their results.

I understand that this minority of underachievers aren't going to be proud of their underachievement (well, some are, but that's another thread), and they should be ashamed if they're in a prestigious university where they have an opportunity many people don't have, and they choose to waste that opportunity by not applying themselves.

Even in the context of the Leaving Certificate, it's not as though they haven't had five years previously (six if they do transition year) to prepare for the exam. People who dismiss it as simply a memory recall exercise are entirely missing the point.

Robsweezie · 11-08-2015 01:57PM

so if we give out about the grade shamers, we're shaming them? shamers getting shamed? shameception? shamers gonna shame

fly_agaric · 11-08-2015 02:07PM

No need for names. With just exam numbers etc you can still have learning experience that majority of the class beat you by 20 % entirely due to your own foolish decisions to not attend the lectures and tutorials.

If you are in the same class and not totally self-deceiving you will also probably have fair idea who the top 10 or so were and standard of work that got them those marks, even if you can't put a name to each grade.

osarusan · 11-08-2015 02:10PM

What is the reasoning behind publishing the list in the first place?

I can't access the Times article in the OP so I'm not clear on how long it has been going on, and what the idea behind it was/is.

One eyed Jack · 11-08-2015 02:24PM

Robsweezie wrote: »

so if we give out about the grade shamers, we're shaming them? shamers getting shamed? shameception? shamers gonna shame

Well you can give out about them, but the fact is that they exist in every facet of reality, and no, it's not the most pleasant thing to happen to someone when someone else goes out of their way to humiliate them, but in this particular context, I don't see why allowances should be made for people who are capable of doing better, but they just don't want to.

Lower grades shouldn't be acceptable, and if people are ashamed of that fact, then the onus is on them to do better, rather than trying to tell everyone else they should make allowances for people who underperform when there's nothing to stop them doing better. It doesn't seem to have stopped Temple Grandin -

Or Joanne O' Riordan, or Jamie Reilly, but a few students who can't be arsed making the effort and don't want people questioning them?

Poor little sensitive dears...

my teapot is orange · 11-08-2015 03:01PM

Everybody is focusing on whether or not it is fair to publish a students grades and whether they are being oversensitive, but what about the other side of the coin. Aside from saying it's not that bad, what's good about it? What purpose does it serve? Is there anything to be gained from it?

ifty661 · 11-08-2015 03:10PM

Its not really that hard for others in the same class/year to work out who got what in exams. All this namby pamby bull about measuring intelligence is just that. They are at University and unless I am doing it wrong the ONLY way to tell how you are getting on with the course is by the grades you get anything else is just wishy washy.

Folk don't have much of a problem shouting about how well they have done (if that is the case) and in some instances it might actually give some folk the kick up the backside they need.

Grade Shaming

Comments